Duffy trial: Bayne paints Senate as a regulatory world of its own

If anyone thought the trial of suspended senator Mike Duffy would dispel the widespread notion of the Senate of Canada as a cushy old boys’ club that operates on nudges and winks, not laws, Duffy’s defence lawyer, Donald Bayne, is slowly proving them wrong.

The rules for how senators spent their office budgets were so loose, Bayne established Wednesday, that contracts were paid out even if no formal contract was in place when the work in question began.

“Guidelines and policies are one thing, but the practices, in fact, are another, right?” Donald Bayne asked Senate human resources officer Sonia Makhlouf. “Yes,” she replied.

Bayne was referring to a contract request submitted by Duffy’s office for $10,000 for “editorial services” to be provided by Gerald Donohue and his company, Maple Ridge Media.

Duffy is facing 31 criminal charges of fraud, breach of trust and bribery. Eight of those charges involve contracts involving Donohue, an old CTV friend of Duffy’s.

Donohue’s contracts, the prosecution has charged, were used as a reserve pool of money so Duffy could skirt Senate administration scrutiny and engage in contracts the Senate may not have approved.

But approval was not hard to obtain, Bayne attempted to demonstrate.

Duffy has been criminally charged for contracts he gave Donohue, as well as sub-contracts or gifts Donohue arranged for Ashley Cain, a volunteer in Duffy’s office, Jacqueline Lambert, a make-up artist, and Mike Croskery, a physical fitness consultant.

He pointed to documents showing the $10,000 request from Donohue was sent to Senate human resources on March 25, 2009, just days before the year-long contract, for what was described as “editorial services”, was over.

Although Senate guidelines at the time stipulated a contract request had to be the crucial first step before actual work started, Makhlouf went ahead and approved Donohue’s request just as his contract was winding up.

She explained to Bayne there was a legal obligation to pay for work that had already been done, even if senators didn’t get the paperwork for approval in on time.

When Bayne queried the obligation, if there was no legal contract in place, Mahklouf replied the senator would tell her, “I have to pay them.”

The next year, in 2010, a request for a contract for Donohue was again submitted by Duffy’s office, this time for $2000 per month for work described for editorial and writing services.

The Senate human resources department insisted a specific amount of money for the contract was needed. This rule, it seemed, could not be thwarted.

Bayne referred to an email written by Marie-Chantal Thériault, a human resources officer who worked with Makhlouf. Thériault helpfully suggested Duffy approximate the total sum based on how much time he expected to be spent on the work Donohue would do.

Makhlouf defended the practice, saying the contract could be amendend when the work was done and the exact amount was known.

Makhlouf, who is only witness number two in day seven of the trial, is in the second day of her cross examination by Bayne. The Crown is expected to call about 50 witnesses.

The slow pace of the proceedings led Justice Charles Vaillancourt to speculate today that the trial may not be over by its scheduled June 16 date.

If the hearing does go into overtime for weeks or even months, it’s not clear where the extra time would come from. Lawyers and the judge may have other legal commitments, or vacation time, and courtroom space can be scarce.

The Crown in Duffy’s case, Mark Holmes, is also prosecuting former Liberal Senator Mac Harb for fraud and breach of trust over his expenses, starting August 10.

If Duffy’s trial were to go into September, its daily revelations could nudge into the campaign for the general election, scheduled for Oct. 19.

1 comment on “Duffy trial: Bayne paints Senate as a regulatory world of its own”

Bottom line….Senators do not and shall not be expected to have a moral compass. Duffy is void of ethical sense and therefor should not be held accountable for reckless and self-serving use of public funds???? The grand defence of “well…. someone else did it first so it’s ok for me to do it now.” I think Harper is culpable for the $90,000 cheque and for lying rather than just admitting that one of his appointments is an ass but, The Ole Duff needs to go down too. A whole bunch of other Senators ought to go down with him.